DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Chat comparison
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vskimi-k3
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
kimi-k3
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
400,000 tokens
kimi-k3Better fit
1,000,000 tokens
Input formats
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
text
kimi-k3
text, image
Vision
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Not supported
kimi-k3Better fit
Supported
JSON mode
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Better fit
Supported
kimi-k3
Not supported
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
71.81%
kimi-k3
98.65%
Average response time
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
46,305 ms
kimi-k3
5,233.65 ms
P95 API latency
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
60,000 ms
kimi-k3
30,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Quick take
- kimi-k3 has a larger context window.
- kimi-k3 supports image input while the other model does not.
- kimi-k3 recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.
- kimi-k3 recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.